Effect of sieving and sample storage on soil respiration and its temperature sensitivity (Q10) in mineral soils from Germany

Show full item record



Permalink

http://hdl.handle.net/10138/308543

Citation

Meyer , N , Welp , G & Amelung , W 2019 , ' Effect of sieving and sample storage on soil respiration and its temperature sensitivity (Q10) in mineral soils from Germany ' , Biology and Fertility of Soils , vol. 55 , no. 8 , pp. 825-832 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-019-01374-7

Title: Effect of sieving and sample storage on soil respiration and its temperature sensitivity (Q10) in mineral soils from Germany
Author: Meyer, N.; Welp, G.; Amelung, W.
Contributor: University of Helsinki, Soils and climate change
Date: 2019-11
Language: eng
Number of pages: 8
Belongs to series: Biology and Fertility of Soils
ISSN: 1432-0789
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10138/308543
Abstract: Knowledge about spatial patterns of soil respiration (SR) and its temperature sensitivity (Q10) is of emerging relevance for assessing carbon fluxes across the landscape. Related experiments are often conducted under controlled laboratory conditions and usually rely on soil samples, which are sieved and stored. Here, we investigated the effect of sieving and storage on SR and Q10. We took 14 samples from different land use types and soil textures. Samples were sieved to 2 mm at field-moist conditions and split into four treatments: sieved/no-storage, sieved/freeze-storage (−18  °C), sieved/cold-storage (+ 4 °C), and sieved/dry-storage (+ 40 °C). The storage time was 7 weeks. Intact soil cores were used as a control. The SR was not significantly affected by sieving/no-storage, sieving/freeze-storage, and sieving/cold-storage compared with the control. Yet, sieving/dry-storage significantly increased SR but all samples were similarly affected (r = 0.81 for the correlation between SR after sieving/dry-storage and SR in the control). The Q10 of sieving/no-storage (1.94 ± 0.28), sieving/freeze-storage (1.94 ± 0.23), sieving/cold-storage (2.37 ± 0.29), and sieving/dry-storage (2.29 ± 1.35) did not differ significantly from the control (2.12 ± 0.23). All samples responded similar to sieving and storage (r = 0.68–0.73 for the correlation between Q10 in each respective treatment and Q10 in the control), with the exception of sieved/dry-storage (r = 0.09). We conclude that sieving at field-moist conditions and subsequent freeze- or cold-storage is acceptable to derive SR and Q10 for the here reported storage time. Although dry-storage may be acceptable for the comparison of SR between samples, it should be avoided for realistic estimates of SR and for the determination of Q10.
Subject: 415 Other agricultural sciences
1171 Geosciences
Heterotrophic soil respiration
Carbon mineralization
Soil pretreatment
Drying and rewetting
ORGANIC-MATTER DECOMPOSITION
MICROBIAL BIOMASS
N-MINERALIZATION
WATER-CONTENT
CARBON
MOISTURE
DEPENDENCE
PATTERNS
SURFACE
MODEL
Rights:


Files in this item

Total number of downloads: Loading...

Files Size Format View
Meyer2019_Artic ... SievingAndSampleStorag.pdf 728.0Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show full item record